[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4hkAN1hz=9yJ2CRYfNQ3Tjwm6z+Fghti9QKZLN-ZfR5aQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 14:29:40 -0800
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Liang Li <liliangleo@...iglobal.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 4/4] mm: pre zero out free pages to speed up page
allocation for __GFP_ZERO
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 12:11 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Am 04.01.2021 um 20:52 schrieb Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>:
> >
> > On 1/4/21 11:27 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 11:19:13AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>> On 12/21/20 8:30 AM, Liang Li wrote:
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> >>>> @@ -137,6 +137,9 @@ enum pageflags {
> >>>> #endif
> >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> >>>> PG_arch_2,
> >>>> +#endif
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREZERO_PAGE
> >>>> + PG_zero,
> >>>> #endif
> >>>> __NR_PAGEFLAGS,
> >>>
> >>> I don't think this is worth a generic page->flags bit.
> >>>
> >>> There's a ton of space in 'struct page' for pages that are in the
> >>> allocator. Can't we use some of that space?
> >>
> >> I was going to object to that too, but I think the entire approach is
> >> flawed and needs to be thrown out. It just nukes the caches in extremely
> >> subtle and hard to measure ways, lowering overall system performance.
> >
> > Yeah, it certainly can't be the default, but it *is* useful for thing
> > where we know that there are no cache benefits to zeroing close to where
> > the memory is allocated.
> >
> > The trick is opting into it somehow, either in a process or a VMA.
> >
>
> The patch set is mostly trying to optimize starting a new process. So process/vma doesn‘t really work.
>
> I still wonder if using tmpfs/shmem cannot somehow be used to cover the original use case of starting a new vm fast (or rebooting an existing one involving restarting the process).
If it's rebooting a VM then file-backed should be able to skip the
zeroing because the stale data exposure is only to itself. If the
memory is being repurposed to a new VM then the file needs to be
reallocated / re-zeroed just like the anonymous case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists